Patterns That Work: Proven Practices to Master the What–How Divide
Patterns That Work are not born in theory — they emerge from practice, pressure, and the messy reality of product development. In earlier posts, we explored why the what–how split matters (Build the Right Thing, the Right Way: Why the What vs. How Split Matters More Than You Think) and how blurred roles or unclear lines can lead to confusion. But theory only gets us so far. What does it actually look like when teams get this right?
This post shares real-world practices — patterns that work — to master the what–how divide without losing collaboration or agility.
1. Anchor Ownership in Roles, Not People
One of the most common failure points is role confusion. Instead of defining the what and the how by personal preference or seniority, high-performing teams anchor clarity in roles.
- Product Owners, Product Managers, or Business Leads own the what: outcomes, priorities, and value.
- Engineers, Designers, Architects and Delivery Teams own the how: solutions, technical decisions, and implementation.
This clear anchoring prevents one person from holding both reins and dragging the team into conflict or micromanagement.
2. Use Lightweight Boundaries, Not Heavy Walls
Successful teams don’t turn the divide into a fortress. They draw a line, but they make it porous.
- Backlog refinement sessions: the what owners explain intent, outcomes, and value. Delivery teams shape this into actionable work.
- Sprint reviews: business leads see the product, give feedback, and re-anchor priorities.
- Design or architecture sessions: engineers lead the how, but with stakeholders involved to align trade-offs.
The pattern here is rhythm — structured points where what and how meet, without daily overreach.
3. Embrace Transparency Over Control
Patterns that work lean on visibility instead of micromanagement. Clear artifacts bridge the divide:
- Impact maps, roadmaps, and OKRs → clarity on what to achieve.
- Workflows, DoD (Definition of Done), and technical designs → clarity on how the work gets done.
When these artifacts are transparent and reviewed regularly, teams avoid constant negotiation and rework.
4. Trust the Tension, Don’t Eliminate It
A subtle but powerful pattern: healthy tension between what and how is not a problem — it’s a feature. The product side will always push for more value, sooner. The delivery side will always push for sustainable pace and quality.
When both sides respect the boundary and stay engaged, this tension produces balance. Teams that succeed don’t try to erase it — they learn to work with it.
5. Codify Feedback Loops
The final practice that works: short, repeatable feedback loops. They prevent the what–how divide from hardening into silos.
- Frequent demos and user feedback validate what.
- Retrospectives improve how.
- Joint reviews (e.g. OKR check-ins, roadmap updates) reconnect both sides.
Patterns that work aren’t static — they evolve because feedback is baked in.
Closing Thoughts
Separating what and how isn’t just a theory; it’s a discipline. And like all disciplines, it benefits from patterns proven in the real world: clear role ownership, lightweight boundaries, transparency, healthy tension, and codified feedback loops.
When these practices come together, the what–how divide stops being a wall of confusion — and becomes a source of clarity and strength.
Read further
Team Topologies by Matthew Skelton & Manuehttps://amzn.to/3VhHeWSl Pais – practical patterns for structuring teams around flow and clear responsibilities.
Inspired by Marty Cagan – timeless guidance on product roles and ownership of the what.
Accelerate by Nicole Forsgren, Jez Humble & Gene Kim – research-backed practices that show how the how impacts delivery performance.